1932

Abstract

Corporate chief executive officers (CEOs) have occupied important positions of power in developed societies since the nineteenth century. In this article, we describe how the nature and extent of this power has changed over time in the United States: from the corporate titans of the early twentieth century, to the bureaucratic organization men of the mid-twentieth century, to a new generation of dynamic, charismatic corporate leaders today. We discuss how the shareholder value movement in the 1980s transformed the role of the CEO and how, paradoxically, as the CEOs' compensation increased, their autonomy declined, potentially reducing their ability to focus on the long-term concerns of their firms or the larger society. We review the literature on CEO compensation, tenure, and discretionary actions, including philanthropic contributions, research and development expenditures, and political action. We conclude with a discussion of the social responsibility of contemporary corporate leaders, while pointing to the need for studies with which we can compare the views of today's CEOs with those of earlier decades.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-081715-074233
2016-07-30
2024-06-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/soc/42/1/annurev-soc-081715-074233.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-081715-074233&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Allen MP, Panian SK. 1982. Power, performance, and succession in the large corporation. Admin. Sci. Q. 27:538–47 [Google Scholar]
  2. Allison DW, Potts BB. 1999. Title wave: the diffusion of the CEO title throughout the US corporate network Cent. Res. Soc. Organ. Work. Pap. Ser. #576, Univ. Mich., Ann Arbor. http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/51340/576.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y [Google Scholar]
  3. Aspen Institute 2010. Short-termism and U.S. capital markets: a compelling case for change. Aspen Inst. Bus. Soc. Program, Washington, DC. http://www.aspeninstitute.org/sites/default/files/content/images/Compelling%20Case%20for%20Change_August2010.pdf [Google Scholar]
  4. Barton AH. 1985. Determinants of economic attitudes in the American business elite. Am. J. Sociol. 91:54–87 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bebchuk L, Fried JM. 2005. Pay without performance: overview of the issues. J. Appl. Corp. Financ. 17:48–23 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bell D. 1960. The End of Ideology: On the Exhaustion of Political Ideas in the Fifties New York: Collier [Google Scholar]
  7. Bell D. 1973. The Coming of Post-Industrial Society: A Venture in Social Forecasting New York: Basic Books [Google Scholar]
  8. Berle AA Jr. 1931. Corporate powers as powers in trust. Harv. Law Rev. 44:1049–74 [Google Scholar]
  9. Berle AA Jr. 1932. For whom corporate managers are trustees: a note. Harv. Law Rev. 45:1365–72 [Google Scholar]
  10. Berle AA Jr., Means GC. 1968 (1932). The Modern Corporation and Private Property New York: Harcourt, Brace & World. Rev, ed.. [Google Scholar]
  11. Bertrand M. 2009. CEOs. Annu. Rev. Econ. 1:121–49 [Google Scholar]
  12. Blumenthal S. 1986. The Rise of the Counter-Establishment: From Conservative Ideology to Political Power New York: Times Books [Google Scholar]
  13. Boeker W. 1992. Power and managerial dismissal: scapegoating at the top. Admin. Sci. Q. 37:400–21 [Google Scholar]
  14. Brandeis LD. 1914. Other People's Money: And How the Bankers Use It New York: Frederick A. Stokes Co. [Google Scholar]
  15. Bratton WW, Wachter ML. 2010. Tracking Berle's footsteps: the trail of The Modern Corporation's last chapter. Seattle Univ. Law Rev. 33:849–75 [Google Scholar]
  16. Broyles PA. 1993. The corporate elite goes to Washington: presidential campaign contributions of corporate officers. Soc. Sci. Res. 22:72–91 [Google Scholar]
  17. Brunell TL. 2005. The relationship between political parties and interest groups: explaining patterns of PAC contributions to candidates for Congress. Polit. Res. Q. 58:681–88 [Google Scholar]
  18. Burris V. 1987. The political partisanship of American business: a study of corporate political action committees. Am. Sociol. Rev. 52:732–44 [Google Scholar]
  19. Burris V. 2001. The two faces of capital: corporations and individual capitalists as political actors. Am. Sociol. Rev. 66:361–81 [Google Scholar]
  20. Burris V. 2005. Interlocking directorates and political cohesion among corporate elites. Am. J. Sociol. 111:249–83 [Google Scholar]
  21. Cannella AA Jr., Lubatkin M. 1993. Succession as a sociopolitical process: internal impediments to outsider selection. Acad. Manag. J. 36:763–93 [Google Scholar]
  22. Chatterjee A, Hambrick DC. 2007. It's all about me: narcissistic chief executive officers and their effects on company strategy and performance. Admin. Sci. Q. 52:351–86 [Google Scholar]
  23. Cheffins B, Bank S. 2009. Is Berle and Means really a myth?. Bus. Hist. Rev. 83:443–74 [Google Scholar]
  24. Clawson D, Neustadtl A. 1989. Interlocks, PACs, and corporate conservatism. Am. J. Sociol. 94:749–73 [Google Scholar]
  25. Clawson D, Neustadtl A, Bearden J. 1986. The logic of business unity: corporate contributions to the 1980 Congressional elections. Am. Sociol. Rev. 51:797–811 [Google Scholar]
  26. Clawson D, Neustadtl A, Weller M. 1998. Dollars and Votes: How Business Campaign Contributions Subvert Democracy Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  27. Clawson D, Su T. 1990. Was 1980 special? A comparison of 1980 and 1986 corporate PAC contributions. Sociol. Q. 31:371–87 [Google Scholar]
  28. Cochran TC, Miller W. 1942. The Age of Enterprise: A Social History of Industrial America New York: Macmillan [Google Scholar]
  29. Collins RM. 1981. The Business Response to Keynes, 1929–1964 New York: Columbia Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  30. Corey L. 1930. The House of Morgan: A Social Biography of the Masters of Money New York: Grosset & Dunlap [Google Scholar]
  31. Dahrendorf R. 1959. Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  32. Davis GF. 2009. Managed by the Markets: How Finance Re-Shaped America New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  33. Davis GF. 2013. After the corporation. Pol. Soc. 41:283–308 [Google Scholar]
  34. Davis GF, Kim EH. 2007. Business ties and proxy voting by mutual funds. J. Financ. Econ. 85:552–70 [Google Scholar]
  35. Davis GF, Thompson TA. 1994. A social movement perspective on corporate control. Admin. Sci. Q. 39:141–73 [Google Scholar]
  36. DiPrete TA, Eirich GM, Pittinsky M. 2010. Compensation benchmarking, leapfrogs, and the surge in executive pay. Am. J. Sociol. 115:1671–712 [Google Scholar]
  37. Dobbin F, Zorn D. 2005. Corporate malfeasance and the myth of shareholder value. Polit. Power Soc. Theory 17:179–98 [Google Scholar]
  38. Dodd EM Jr. 1932. For whom are corporate managers trustees?. Harv. Law Rev. 45:1145–63 [Google Scholar]
  39. Dreiling M. 2001. Solidarity and Contention: The Politics of Security and Sustainability in the NAFTA Conflict New York: Garland Publ. [Google Scholar]
  40. Dreiling M, Darves D. 2011. Corporate unity in American trade policy: a network analysis of corporate-dyad political action. Am. J. Sociol. 116:1514–63 [Google Scholar]
  41. Drutman L. 2015. The Business of America Is Lobbying: How Corporations Became Politicized and Politics Became More Corporate New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  42. Economist 2015. An investor calls. Feb 7. http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21642175-sometimes-ill-mannered-speculative-and-wrong-activists-are-rampant-they-will-change-american
  43. Ferguson T, Rogers J. 1986. Right Turn: The Decline of the Democrats and the Future of American Politics New York: Hill & Wang [Google Scholar]
  44. Fligstein N. 1990. The Transformation of Corporate Control Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  45. Fones-Wolf EA. 1994. Selling Free Enterprise: The Business Assault on Labor and Liberalism Urbana: Univ. Ill. Press [Google Scholar]
  46. Fortune 1939. What business thinks. October 52–53, 90–98
  47. Fortune 1970. What business thinks: The Fortune 500–Yankelovich survey. February 118–19171–72
  48. Freeland C. 2012. Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else New York: Penguin Books [Google Scholar]
  49. Freitag PJ. 1975. The cabinet and big business: a study of interlocks. Soc. Probl. 23:137–52 [Google Scholar]
  50. Friedman M. 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Mag. Sept. 13 SM17 [Google Scholar]
  51. Frydman C, Saks RE. 2010. Executive compensation: a new view from a long-term perspective. Rev. Financ. Stud. 23:2099–138 [Google Scholar]
  52. Gabaix X, Landier A. 2008. Why has CEO pay increased so much?. Q. J. Econ. 123:49–100 [Google Scholar]
  53. Gamson WA, Scotch NA. 1964. Scapegoating in baseball. Am. J. Sociol. 70:69–72 [Google Scholar]
  54. Goldstein A. 2012. Revenge of the managers: labor cost-cutting and the paradoxical resurgence of managerialism in the shareholder value era, 1984 to 2001. Am. Sociol. Rev. 77:268–94 [Google Scholar]
  55. Graham JR, Harvey CR, Rajgopal S. 2005. The economic implications of corporate financial reporting. J. Account. Econ. 40:3–73 [Google Scholar]
  56. Grusky O. 1963. Managerial succession and organizational effectiveness. Am. J. Sociol. 69:21–31 [Google Scholar]
  57. Grusky O. 1964. Reply. Am. J. Sociol. 70:72–76 [Google Scholar]
  58. Hacker JS, Pierson P. 2011. Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer—and Turned Its Back on the Middle Class New York: Simon & Schuster [Google Scholar]
  59. Hallock KF. 1997. Reciprocally interlocking boards of directors and executive compensation. J. Financ. Quant. Anal. 32:331–44 [Google Scholar]
  60. Handler E, Mulkern JR. 1982. Business in Politics: Campaign Strategies of Corporate Political Action Committees Lexington, MA: Lexington Books [Google Scholar]
  61. Hannan MT, Freeman J. 1989. Organizational Ecology Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  62. Heerwig J, Murray J. 2015. The partisanship and ideology of the American corporate inner circle: evidence from political donations, 1982–2000. Presented at the Annu. Meet. Am. Sociol. Assoc., 110th, Chicago
  63. Herman ES. 1981. Corporate Control, Corporate Power New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  64. Hirschey M, Skiba H, Wintoki MB. 2012. The size, concentration and evolution of corporate R&D spending in U.S. firms from 1976 to 2010: evidence and implications. J. Corp. Finance 18:496–518 [Google Scholar]
  65. Huang SK. 2013. The impact of CEO characteristics on corporate sustainable development. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 20:234–44 [Google Scholar]
  66. James DR, Soref M. 1981. Profit constraints on managerial autonomy: managerial theory and the unmaking of the corporation president. Am. Sociol. Rev. 46:1–18 [Google Scholar]
  67. Jensen MC, Meckling WH. 1976. Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. J. Financ. Econ. 3:305–60 [Google Scholar]
  68. Josephson M. 1962 (1934). The Robber Barons: The Great American Capitalists 1861–1901 New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich [Google Scholar]
  69. Josephson M. 1972. The Money Lords: The Great Finance Capitalists 1925–1950 New York: New Am. Libr. [Google Scholar]
  70. Judis JB. 2001. The Paradox of American Democracy: Elites, Special Interests, and the Betrayal of the Public Trust New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  71. Kaplan SN. 2008. Are U.S. CEOs overpaid?. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 22:25–20 [Google Scholar]
  72. Kaplan SN, Minton B. 2008. How has CEO turnover changed? Increasingly performance sensitive boards and increasingly uneasy CEOs Work. Pap., Booth Sch. Bus., Univ. Chicago [Google Scholar]
  73. Kaplan SN, Minton BA. 2012. How has CEO turnover changed?. Int. Rev. Finance 12:57–87 [Google Scholar]
  74. Kaysen C. 1957. The social significance of the modern corporation. Am. Econ. Rev. 47:2311–19 [Google Scholar]
  75. Khurana R. 2002. Searching for a Corporate Savior: The Irrational Quest for Charismatic CEOs Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  76. Khurana R. 2007. From Higher Aims to Hired Hands: The Social Transformation of American Business Schools and the Unfulfilled Promise of Management as a Profession Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  77. Kim JW, Kogut B, Yang J-S. 2015. Executive compensation, fat cats, and best athletes. Am. Sociol. Rev. 80:299–328 [Google Scholar]
  78. Kotz DM. 1978. Bank Control of Large Corporations in the United States Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press [Google Scholar]
  79. Krooss HE. 1970. Executive Opinion: What Business Leaders Said and Thought, 1920s–1960s Garden City, NY: Doubleday [Google Scholar]
  80. La Porta R, Lopez-de-Silanes F, Shleifer A. 1999. Corporate ownership around the world. J. Finance 54:471–517 [Google Scholar]
  81. Lieberson S, O'Connor JF. 1972. Leadership and organizational performance: a study of large corporations. Am. Sociol. Rev. 37:117–30 [Google Scholar]
  82. Lundstrum LL. 2002. Corporate investment myopia: a horserace of the theories. J. Corp. Finance 8:353–71 [Google Scholar]
  83. Manne HG. 1965. Mergers and the market for corporate control. J. Polit. Econ. 73:110–20 [Google Scholar]
  84. Manner MH. 2010. The impact of CEO characteristics on corporate social performance. J. Bus. Ethics 93:53–72 [Google Scholar]
  85. March JG, Simon HA. 1958. Organizations New York: John Wiley & Sons [Google Scholar]
  86. Marquis C, Lee M. 2013. Who is governing whom? Executives, governance, and the structure of generosity in large U.S. firms. Strateg. Manag. J. 34:483–97 [Google Scholar]
  87. McKay A. 2010. The effects of interest groups' ideology on their PAC and lobbying expenditures. Bus. Polit. 12:21–21 [Google Scholar]
  88. Mintz B. 1975. The president's cabinet, 1897–1972: a contribution to the power structure debate. Crit. Sociol. 5:3131–48 [Google Scholar]
  89. Mitchell NJ. 1989. The Generous Corporation: A Political Analysis of Economic Power New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  90. Mizruchi MS. 1982. The American Corporate Network, 1904–1974 Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publ. [Google Scholar]
  91. Mizruchi MS. 1989. Similarity of political behavior among large American corporations. Am. J. Sociol. 95:401–24 [Google Scholar]
  92. Mizruchi MS. 1992. The Structure of Corporate Political Action: Interfirm Relations and Their Consequences Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  93. Mizruchi MS. 2004. Berle and Means revisited: the governance and power of large U.S. corporations. Theory Soc. 33:579–617 [Google Scholar]
  94. Mizruchi MS. 2013. The Fracturing of the American Corporate Elite Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  95. Moody J. 1919. The Masters of Capital: A Chronicle of Wall Street New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  96. Murphy KJ, Zábojník J. 2004. CEO pay and appointments: a market-based explanation for recent trends. Am. Econ. Rev. 94:2192–96 [Google Scholar]
  97. Newmyer T. 2015. The inside story of how big business lost Washington. Fortune Feb 20. http://fortune.com/2015/02/20/the-inside-story-of-how-big-business-lost-washington/ [Google Scholar]
  98. Ocasio W. 1994. Political dynamics and the circulation of power: CEO succession in U.S. industrial corporations, 1960–1990. Admin. Sci. Q. 39:285–312 [Google Scholar]
  99. O'Reilly CA III, Main BG, Crystal GS. 1988. CEO compensation as tournament and social comparison: a tale of two theories. Admin. Sci. Q. 33:257–74 [Google Scholar]
  100. Park SH, Westphal JD, Stern I. 2011. Set up for a fall: the insidious effects of flattery and opinion conformity toward corporate leaders. Admin. Sci. Q. 56:257–302 [Google Scholar]
  101. Phillips-Fein K. 2009. Invisible Hands: The Businessmen's Crusade Against the New Deal New York: Norton [Google Scholar]
  102. Poole KT, Rosenthal HL. 2007. Ideology and Congress New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publ. [Google Scholar]
  103. Puffer SM, Weintrop JB. 1991. Corporate performance and CEO turnover: the role of performance expectations. Admin. Sci. Q. 36:1–19 [Google Scholar]
  104. Rehbein K, Waddock S, Graves SB. 2004. Understanding shareholder activism: Which corporations are targeted?. Bus. Soc. 43:239–67 [Google Scholar]
  105. Schriftgiesser K. 1960. Business Comes of Age: The Story of the Committee for Economic Development and its Impact upon the Economic Policies of the United States, 1942–1960 New York: Harper & Brothers [Google Scholar]
  106. Shin T, You J. 2015. CEO dismissal and the CEO's symbolic use of shareholder-value language Presented at Annu. Meet. Am. Sociol. Assoc., 110th, Chicago [Google Scholar]
  107. Sørensen AB. 2000. Toward a sounder basis for class analysis. Am. J. Sociol. 105:1523–58 [Google Scholar]
  108. Stearns LB, Allan KD. 1996. Economic behavior in institutional environments: the corporate merger wave of the 1980s. Am. Sociol. Rev. 61:699–718 [Google Scholar]
  109. Thomas AB. 1988. Does leadership make a difference to organizational performance?. Admin. Sci. Q. 33:388–400 [Google Scholar]
  110. Thornton PH, Ocasio W. 1999. Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organizations: executive succession in the higher education publishing industry, 1958–1990. Am. J. Sociol. 105:801–43 [Google Scholar]
  111. Useem M. 1993. Executive Defense: Shareholder Power and Corporate Reorganization Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  112. Useem M. 1996. Investor Capitalism: How Money Managers Are Changing the Face of Corporate America New York: Basic Books [Google Scholar]
  113. Vogel D. 1989. Fluctuating Fortunes: The Political Power of Business in America New York: Basic Books [Google Scholar]
  114. Walker ET. 2013. Signaling responsibility, deflecting controversy: strategic and institutional influences on the charitable giving of corporate foundations in the health sector. Res. Polit. Sociol. 21:181–214 [Google Scholar]
  115. Walker ET. 2014. Grassroots for Hire: Public Affairs Consultants in American Democracy New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  116. Walker ET, Rea CM. 2014. The political mobilization of firms and industries. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 40:281–304 [Google Scholar]
  117. Walsh JP. 2008. CEO compensation and the responsibilities of the business scholar to society. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 22:226–33 [Google Scholar]
  118. Weinstein J. 1968. The Corporate Ideal in the Liberal State, 1900–1918 Boston, MA: Beacon Press [Google Scholar]
  119. Weisskopf TE, Bowles S, Gordon DM. 1983. Hearts and minds: a social model of U.S. productivity growth. Brook. Pap. Econ. Act. 83:2381–450 [Google Scholar]
  120. Westphal JD, Stern I. 2006. The other pathway to the boardroom: interpersonal influence behavior as a substitute for elite credentials and majority status in obtaining board appointments. Admin. Sci. Q. 51:169–204 [Google Scholar]
  121. Westphal JD, Zajac EJ. 1995. Who shall govern? CEO/board power, demographic similarity, and new director selection. Admin. Sci. Q. 40:60–83 [Google Scholar]
  122. Whitman MvN. 1999. New World, New Rules: The Changing Role of the American Corporation Boston, MA: Harvard Bus. Sch. Press [Google Scholar]
  123. Winters JA. 2011. Oligarchy New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  124. Youngman A. 1907. The tendency of modern combination: I. J. Polit. Econ. 15:193–208 [Google Scholar]
  125. Yue LQ. 2015. Community constraints on the efficacy of elite mobilization: the issuance of currency substitutes during the Panic of 1907. Am. J. Sociol. 120:1690–735 [Google Scholar]
  126. Zajac EJ, Westphal JD. 2004. The social construction of market value: institutionalization and learning perspectives on stock market reactions. Am. Sociol. Rev. 69:433–57 [Google Scholar]
  127. Zeitlin M. 1974. Corporate ownership and control: the large corporation and the capitalist class. Am. J. Sociol. 79:1073–119 [Google Scholar]
  128. Zweigenhaft RL, Domhoff GW. 2011. The New CEOs: Women, African American, Latino, and Asian American Leaders of Fortune 500 Companies Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-081715-074233
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error